AARoads Forum

A major setback occurred today in the development of replacing the I-10 Calcasieu River Bridge in Lake Charles.


Turns out, the Louisiana legislative committee that regulates funding for transportation projects rejected by majority vote the plan offered by LADOTD which would have partially funded the project with revenue from tolls placed on the new bridge.


It was mostly trucking interests that convinced the majority to reject the contract proposal, since truckers would probably bear the brunt of the tolls; but there was very strong public opposition in general to tolling expressed all during the design and environmental approval process.


It looks now as if LADOTD will have to either come up with more non-toll revenue to fund the bridge, or steal from other projects, or delay construction until they can secure the funds.


The story, courtesy of the Acadiana Advocate:


Plan to build a new Lake Charles I-10 bridge may be dead. Here's why lawmakers rejected it. (https://www.theadvocate.com/lake_charles/new-southwest-louisiana-bridge-projects-hits-major-setback/article_6ce864d3-da50-53b9-a245-c5bb4dbb2292.html#tncms-source=aca-featured-3)

I feel like this is one of those things the federal government should pick up the tab for... It's on a major east-west interstate highway, it shouldn't even be a question. Especially a project of this scale.

It's sad our country is in a state where this has to be negotiated for years, if not decades, back and forth just to figure out a funding and tolling plan.

Quote from: sprjus4 on October 25, 2023, 02:11:35 AM
I feel like this is one of those things the federal government should pick up the tab for... It's on a major east-west interstate highway, it shouldn't even be a question. Especially a project of this scale.

It's sad our country is in a state where this has to be negotiated for years, if not decades, back and forth just to figure out a funding and tolling plan.

See the $800m in federal and state and federal cash mentioned.  I'd bet that's federal funds and the state match (90/10).

I wonder if there are any truly 100% FHWA funded megaprojects.  States or authorities usually have to kick in something.

Quote from: Rothman on October 25, 2023, 07:00:35 AM

Quote from: sprjus4 on October 25, 2023, 02:11:35 AM
I feel like this is one of those things the federal government should pick up the tab for... It's on a major east-west interstate highway, it shouldn't even be a question. Especially a project of this scale.

It's sad our country is in a state where this has to be negotiated for years, if not decades, back and forth just to figure out a funding and tolling plan.

See the $800m in federal and state and federal cash mentioned.  I'd bet that's federal funds and the state match (90/10).

I wonder if there are any truly 100% FHWA funded megaprojects.  States or authorities usually have to kick in something.

Is tolling of mostly federally funded projects allowed? Tappan Zee did get a loan from federal government only, for example. And arguably it's another pretty important one

Quote from: kalvado on October 25, 2023, 08:48:19 AM

Quote from: Rothman on October 25, 2023, 07:00:35 AM

Quote from: sprjus4 on October 25, 2023, 02:11:35 AM
I feel like this is one of those things the federal government should pick up the tab for... It's on a major east-west interstate highway, it shouldn't even be a question. Especially a project of this scale.

It's sad our country is in a state where this has to be negotiated for years, if not decades, back and forth just to figure out a funding and tolling plan.

See the $800m in federal and state and federal cash mentioned.  I'd bet that's federal funds and the state match (90/10).

I wonder if there are any truly 100% FHWA funded megaprojects.  States or authorities usually have to kick in something.

Is tolling of mostly federally funded projects allowed? Tappan Zee did get a loan from federal government only, for example. And arguably it's another pretty important one

PPPs allowed it, for better or for worse (spoiler: for worse).

I think DEAD is a little bit reactionary . The reality is this is the most pressing highway need in Louisiana in the next ten years. It will be built one way or another. The trucking interests realize this. If they felt there was no other way to get it built they would be on board for the tolls. LA-1 south of Baton Rouge would not have been built without the tolls. Louisiana voters decidedly voted to remove the tolls from the Crescent City Connection bridges around ten years ago. They will figure out how to fund it one way or another It may delay other projects as the funds are reallocated, but it will almost surely be built before the mid-2030's.

For what it is worth. Louisiana's share of this bridge will only be 20%. But the other 80% (the federal funds) will obviously be spent somewhere in LA. So it is 100% funds controlled by the state of Louisiana.

It will eventually be built one way or another. We need this bridge more than anything else in the state, honestly.

Unless a hurricane comes in and destroys it, or a collapse results in deaths and lawsuits. Whatever is easier for DOTD.

Is it possible to force the truckers to use I-210 to bypass the Calcasieu River bridge or does the I-210 bridge have the same issue as the I-10 bridge?

The I-210 bridge is pretty much just as narrow. 4 lanes. No shoulders.

Quote from: bwana39 on October 25, 2023, 11:40:29 AM
I think DEAD is a little bit reactionary . The reality is this is the most pressing highway need in Louisiana in the next ten years. It will be built one way or another. The trucking interests realize this. If they felt there was no other way to get it built they would be on board for the tolls. LA-1 south of Baton Rouge would not have been built without the tolls. Louisiana voters decidedly voted to remove the tolls from the Crescent City Connection bridges around ten years ago. They will figure out how to fund it one way or another It may delay other projects as the funds are reallocated, but it will almost surely be built before the mid-2030's.

For what it is worth. Louisiana's share of this bridge will only be 20%. But the other 80% (the federal funds) will obviously be spent somewhere in LA. So it is 100% funds controlled by the state of Louisiana.

Yeah, I didn't mean to put it so extreme as it was permanently dead; the Advocate article's title seemed to overdo that impression.

I could see why truckers were raising all Hell about the $12.50 tolls; not all haulers are corporations, and that's a pretty big chunk of your revenue, especially when considering that the toll for cars would be as low as 50 cents, AND local traffic would have been exempt from paying those tolls. And, there was plenty of opposition to tolling voiced during the public meetings and Public Hearing; the majority opinion was that if this improvement was as important as it was, it should be funded "free" with Federal funds rather than tolls.

That's why it was a bit surprising that it was a Republican-dominated committee that rejected the final bid for the P3 partnership; normally, our conservatives here tend to want to push costs onto users and I really thought they would favor the toll agreement just to get the bridge done sooner. Guess not, or those truckers got some major pull.

(Nothing ideological here; maybe it's just like in Texas, we're getting a backlash against using tolling for funding projects.)

BTW, with recent developments (like, say, our new US House Speaker being from Louisiana), there may be a push to get more Fed funds to build this bridge toll free; or, our Legislature will finally wise up and go with another dedicated tax to fund whatever megaprojects they missed with the TIMED package last go-round. (Imagine if I-49 South had been on there and not the Audubon Bridge.)

I-10 Calcasieu River Bridge ... IS ... dead.

Quote from: Anthony_JK on October 25, 2023, 10:17:19 PM

Quote from: bwana39 on October 25, 2023, 11:40:29 AM
I think DEAD is a little bit reactionary . The reality is this is the most pressing highway need in Louisiana in the next ten years. It will be built one way or another. The trucking interests realize this. If they felt there was no other way to get it built they would be on board for the tolls. LA-1 south of Baton Rouge would not have been built without the tolls. Louisiana voters decidedly voted to remove the tolls from the Crescent City Connection bridges around ten years ago. They will figure out how to fund it one way or another It may delay other projects as the funds are reallocated, but it will almost surely be built before the mid-2030's.

For what it is worth. Louisiana's share of this bridge will only be 20%. But the other 80% (the federal funds) will obviously be spent somewhere in LA. So it is 100% funds controlled by the state of Louisiana.

Yeah, I didn't mean to put it so extreme as it was permanently dead; the Advocate article's title seemed to overdo that impression.

I could see why truckers were raising all Hell about the $12.50 tolls; not all haulers are corporations, and that's a pretty big chunk of your revenue, especially when considering that the toll for cars would be as low as 50 cents, AND local traffic would have been exempt from paying those tolls. And, there was plenty of opposition to tolling voiced during the public meetings and Public Hearing; the majority opinion was that if this improvement was as important as it was, it should be funded "free" with Federal funds rather than tolls.

That's why it was a bit surprising that it was a Republican-dominated committee that rejected the final bid for the P3 partnership; normally, our conservatives here tend to want to push costs onto users and I really thought they would favor the toll agreement just to get the bridge done sooner. Guess not, or those truckers got some major pull.

(Nothing ideological here; maybe it's just like in Texas, we're getting a backlash against using tolling for funding projects.)

BTW, with recent developments (like, say, our new US House Speaker being from Louisiana), there may be a push to get more Fed funds to build this bridge toll free; or, our Legislature will finally wise up and go with another dedicated tax to fund whatever megaprojects they missed with the TIMED package last go-round. (Imagine if I-49 South had been on there and not the Audubon Bridge.)

$12.50, eh?

(Truckers in the northeast snicker as they often pay $15 - $20 minimum.) 

And you probably don't want to know what they pay in the NYC region, or the travels they need to do to get around those tolls.

Quote from: Anthony_JKThat's why it was a bit surprising that it was a Republican-dominated committee that rejected the final bid for the P3 partnership; normally, our conservatives here tend to want to push costs onto users and I really thought they would favor the toll agreement just to get the bridge done sooner. Guess not, or those truckers got some major pull.

Reagan style pro-business Republicans might have favored a toll arrangement rather than using tax dollars. Those aren't the kind of Republicans dominating that party anymore. Now it's performative "populism," driven by divas who say a lot of outrageous things to draw the attention of TV cameras. Media whores basically. That's the logic behind those guys being anti-toll now. It's another populist move.

Of course this isn't an either-or choice between paying for a bridge with tolls or gasoline tax revenue. Can't risk "going to the left" for choosing to pay for a bridge with gasoline tax revenue, or (gasp) even risk hiking gasoline taxes to pay for increased road building costs. It's better to just do nothing, spend nothing and wait til some disaster happens.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 26, 2023, 03:01:12 PM

Quote from: Anthony_JKThat's why it was a bit surprising that it was a Republican-dominated committee that rejected the final bid for the P3 partnership; normally, our conservatives here tend to want to push costs onto users and I really thought they would favor the toll agreement just to get the bridge done sooner. Guess not, or those truckers got some major pull.

Reagan style pro-business Republicans might have favored a toll arrangement rather than using tax dollars. Those aren't the kind of Republicans dominating that party anymore. Now it's performative "populism," driven by divas who say a lot of outrageous things to draw the attention of TV cameras. Media whores basically. That's the logic behind those guys being anti-toll now. It's another populist move.

Of course this isn't an either-or choice between paying for a bridge with tolls or gasoline tax revenue. Can't risk "going to the left" for choosing to pay for a bridge with gasoline tax revenue, or (gasp) even risk hiking gasoline taxes to pay for increased road building costs. It's better to just do nothing, spend nothing and wait til some disaster happens.

Given multibillion cost of major bridges and minimal amount of tax they generate (if not reduce by creating shorter routes!) IMHO tolling those bridges isn't too bad of an idea.
Question is where threshold for such toll should be. I certainly don't want an overpass at my I-xx exit to become tolled specifically; but tolling that bridge that is the  bottleneck for commute.. Especially if those  funds are going to be spent on adding an extra lane! 

Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 26, 2023, 03:01:12 PM

Quote from: Anthony_JKThat's why it was a bit surprising that it was a Republican-dominated committee that rejected the final bid for the P3 partnership; normally, our conservatives here tend to want to push costs onto users and I really thought they would favor the toll agreement just to get the bridge done sooner. Guess not, or those truckers got some major pull.

I don't know.....our

Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 26, 2023, 03:01:12 PM

Quote from: Anthony_JKThat's why it was a bit surprising that it was a Republican-dominated committee that rejected the final bid for the P3 partnership; normally, our conservatives here tend to want to push costs onto users and I really thought they would favor the toll agreement just to get the bridge done sooner. Guess not, or those truckers got some major pull.

Reagan style pro-business Republicans might have favored a toll arrangement rather than using tax dollars. Those aren't the kind of Republicans dominating that party anymore. Now it's performative "populism," driven by divas who say a lot of outrageous things to draw the attention of TV cameras. Media whores basically. That's the logic behind those guys being anti-toll now. It's another populist move.

Of course this isn't an either-or choice between paying for a bridge with tolls or gasoline tax revenue. Can't risk "going to the left" for choosing to pay for a bridge with gasoline tax revenue, or (gasp) even risk hiking gasoline taxes to pay for increased road building costs. It's better to just do nothing, spend nothing and wait til some disaster happens.

I don't know....our Looooziana conservatives tend to be about as "populist" as across the South goes; I still remember the huge backlash to the Trans-Texas Corridor grabs that were initially proposed for I-69 and I-14 in the aughts, and how that crashed and burned to a cinder after plenty of corporate Repubs raised pure hell over the ROW seizures and the huge dependency on tolls.

I'm not really against tolling the Calcasieu bridge, especially if it's done through AET via GeauxPass and discounts are allowed for those in Westlake and LCH who would be some of the biggest users of it. I'm just kind of surprised that the truckers raised that much Hell over the tolls, and were so able to twist some....body parts to get the P3 shut down. (Plenty of Lake Charles locals didn't particularly like the tolls, either, and were pushing hard for more public funding, but they probably would have taken the loss for the upgrade of the bridge.

There's no doubt in my mind that that bridge will get replaced sooner than later; it's one barge tap away from going full Old Tampa Skyway Bridge, and it's a major 2x2 PITA bottleneck for I-10 traffic between 2 3x3 segments (once Cooney Creek to the Sabine River Bridge is completed).

Quote from: Anthony_JKI don't know....our Looooziana conservatives tend to be about as "populist" as across the South goes; I still remember the huge backlash to the Trans-Texas Corridor grabs that were initially proposed for I-69 and I-14 in the aughts, and how that crashed and burned to a cinder after plenty of corporate Repubs raised pure hell over the ROW seizures and the huge dependency on tolls.

The transition of the GOP from a more business-minded conservative into the media-controlled, populist one it is today was already well underway when the Trans Texas Corridors were proposed in 2001. 24 hour cable TV channels were already digging their hooks deep into the process back then. The 9-11 tragedy help the cable news channels refine and perfect their approach at dispensing outrage.

The Trans Texas Corridor idea didn't fail right away. It took a few years worth of public outrage cycles to kill it.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 26, 2023, 09:22:24 PM

Quote from: Anthony_JKI don't know....our Looooziana conservatives tend to be about as "populist" as across the South goes; I still remember the huge backlash to the Trans-Texas Corridor grabs that were initially proposed for I-69 and I-14 in the aughts, and how that crashed and burned to a cinder after plenty of corporate Repubs raised pure hell over the ROW seizures and the huge dependency on tolls.

The transition of the GOP from a more business-minded conservative into the media-controlled, populist one it is today was already well underway when the Trans Texas Corridors were proposed in 2001. 24 hour cable TV channels were already digging their hooks deep into the process back then. The 9-11 tragedy help the cable news channels refine and perfect their approach at dispensing outrage.

The Trans Texas Corridor idea didn't fail right away. It took a few years worth of public outrage cycles to kill it.

The GOP rhetoric has been strong on the forum as of late...

Found this related article from the Lake Charles American Press on the Senate Joint Transportation Committee rejecting the P3 proposal for the I-10 Calcasieu River Bridge replacement:

https://www.americanpress.com/2023/10/24/breaking-p3-proposal-for-i-10-bridge-replacement-shot-down/

Apparently, the Lake Charles delegation to the state Legislature balked big time about the escalating cost of the project, and especially about the imposition of tolls; some even implied that they were snookered into supporting the project just before learning about a proposal that would have kept but renovated the existing bridge for as low as $200-$300 million, rather than the $1-2 billion cost of the replacement.

They are still negotiating the final terms of the P3, though; I'm guessing the Legislature and incoming Governor Taylor will have plenty to say on this.

Gonna be munching the popcorn while they figure out that one. Those OLD and LONG bridges over swamp land are not going to be cheap or easy to replace.

Louisiana is seriously gonna have to come up with an ambitious proposal to ramp up their road funding.

Louisiana has very big problems regarding I-10 -in more locations than just Lake Charles. The Calcasieu River Bridge really does need to be replaced (and replaced with a higher capacity roadway, either 3x3 or 4x4 lanes). What's going to suck is when they finally get around to replacing that bridge the thru traffic on I-10 may be forced to use I-210. I don't see them building a new bridge parallel to the existing one, not unless they intend to wipe out North Beach park or demolish all the businesses on the other side of I-10 to make room for bridge approaches.

The Israel LaFleur Bridge (I-210) in Lake Charles is hardly any better than Calcasieu River Bridge. If I-10 traffic is routed there it could result in a serious bottleneck.

Meanwhile the old and long I-10 bridges crossing the Atchafalaya Swamp and Maurepas Swamp aren't getting any better with age either.

Way back when those I-10 projects were built the tax levels across the country were quite a bit higher. In the decades since many politicians have doled out tax cut candy to individuals and businesses and still rail about wasteful spending so they can justify handing out even more tax cut candy. It's also worth mentioning the process to build a new highway bridge 50 years ago was much faster (and thus less expensive) than it is today.

Something has to give. Unfortunately the kind of "lawmakers" us fools in the general public choose to elect have no real leadership skills. They're cowards. They're not willing to tell voters the simple truth that things like freeway bridges over ship channels cost a shit-ton of money to build and maintain. The money has to come from somewhere. If no one want to pay for it then maybe they just need to tear it down. US-190 can become the new primary East-West route across Louisiana.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 03, 2024, 11:09:41 AM
Louisiana has very big problems regarding I-10 -in more locations than just Lake Charles. The Calcasieu River Bridge really does need to be replaced (and replaced with a higher capacity roadway, either 3x3 or 4x4 lanes). What's going to suck is when they finally get around to replacing that bridge the thru traffic on I-10 may be forced to use I-210. I don't see them building a new bridge parallel to the existing one, not unless they intend to wipe out North Beach park or demolish all the businesses on the other side of I-10 to make room for bridge approaches.

The Israel LaFleur Bridge (I-210) in Lake Charles is hardly any better than Calcasieu River Bridge. If I-10 traffic is routed there it could result in a serious bottleneck.

Meanwhile the old and long I-10 bridges crossing the Atchafalaya Swamp and Maurepas Swamp aren't getting any better with age either.

Way back when those I-10 projects were built the tax levels across the country were quite a bit higher. In the decades since many politicians have doled out tax cut candy to individuals and businesses and still rail about wasteful spending so they can justify handing out even more tax cut candy. It's also worth mentioning the process to build a new highway bridge 50 years ago was much faster (and thus less expensive) than it is today.

Something has to give. Unfortunately the kind of "lawmakers" us fools in the general public choose to elect have no real leadership skills. They're cowards. They're not willing to tell voters the simple truth that things like freeway bridges over ship channels cost a shit-ton of money to build and maintain. The money has to come from somewhere. If no one want to pay for it then maybe they just need to tear it down. US-190 can become the new primary East-West route across Louisiana.

My strong impression is that existing infrastructure is not affordable with current level of GDP and construction pricing. That goes way beyond a few bridges. Basically once existing stuff is worn out, game is mostly over. If nothing changes.

One of the fundamental problems is we have a government that is essentially a government of the lawyers, by the lawyers and for the lawyers. Attorneys are the very thing cooking up all the red tape that chokes every government agency. Why do they do that? It gets them more legal business! Job security. More money.

Whenever a new highway project is announced it's literally ringing the dinner bell for law firms. America has more lawyers per capita than any other nation.

I'm not saying we should just do away with attorneys. Government agencies need to be held in check as well. But we need some kind of sensible balance. America looks laughably pathetic compared to the rest of the world in its ability to build out big infrastructure projects anymore. We can't build a road or train tunnel anymore without the effort costing billions of dollars and decades to complete. It's shameful.

Quote from: kalvado on January 03, 2024, 12:53:08 PM
My strong impression is that existing infrastructure is not affordable with current level of GDP and construction pricing. That goes way beyond a few bridges. Basically once existing stuff is worn out, game is mostly over. If nothing changes.

This is a good observation which is corroborated by real-world data.

I've seen a "rule of thumb" that heavy construction costs increase at twice the rate of overall CPI inflation in the economy. I once did an analysis for a long period for the Texas highway cost index for around 2000 to 2015, and this turned out to be nearly exactly correct for the period, with CPI inflation at 2% and Texas highway construction inflation at 4%. In fact, I believe TxDOT uses 4% inflation for planning purposes.

With compounding over long time horizons, this inflation difference becomes dramatic. For example, suppose we go back to 1964 and apply this rule for 60 years. For $100
2% inflation: $328
4% inflation: $1052
This means that a project today costs 3.2 times as much as it did in the 1960s, when most highway infrastructure was originally built. In reality, I think costs are even higher than the highway cost index indicates due to other costs like lengthy environmental studies, mitigation and larger bureaucracies.

As time goes on, major infrastructure becomes increasingly unaffordable, and at a certain point it can no longer be done with available resources. That point has probably been reached in many places. For example, if the Calcasieu bridge cost only 1/3.2 = 31% as much as the present estimate, it would be much easier to achieve (and would probably already be done).

The situation is much worse for public transit infrastructure, where costs have escalated to be beyond ridiculous. For example, Houston (http://houstonstrategies.blogspot.com/2022/07/comparing-inflating-costs-of-houston.html) opened a section of surface light rail in 2004 which cost $44 million per mile. In 2015, the cost for extensions was around $150 per mile. Austin is proceeding with surface light rail and most recent estimate I've seen in $459 to $490 million per mile, which includes a new bridge over Lake Lady Bird. A planned tunnel in Austin was canceled when the estimated cost escalated to $1 billion per mile. Tunnels are another subject where cost has escalated out of control.

Many high-wealth but high cost places like New York City and California will struggle just to maintain what they have. High wealth and moderate cost areas like Texas will continue to be able to build infrastructure, but increased costs will limit what can be done. (The Texas highway cost index is up 58% (https://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/cst/hci-binder.pdf) since June 2021.) Low wealth areas with large needs like Louisiana will face a reckoning, as mentioned by kalvado, and may not be able to maintain what they have without substantial financial help.

I worry the entire country will face a reckoning in the not very distant future. Infrastructure isn't the only industry where cost inflation has been way out of hand with the "Core CPI" figure. Cost inflation in Health Care, Higher Education and (lately) Housing has been ridiculous. I worry the current housing bubble is getting a lot worse than the one in the mid 2000's. This shit is just not sustainable.

We're in the early stages of what could be a slow-rolling disaster in generation demographics. Simply put: America is well on its way to having too many elderly people and not enough working age taxpayers to both staff and sustain so many systems we take for granted. China is getting into deep shit over this very situation. America has various industries that have been price gouging the public for a long time. I think their gravy train will come to a screeching halt within the next 10-20 years. A shrinking work force won't be able to afford massive tax hikes and price hikes to cover those costs.

America's railroad industry has been "decommissioning" tens of thousands of miles worth of existing track for decades. They're still ripping out more old track than they are laying down new rail lines. We might start seeing that with our highways.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 03, 2024, 11:15:00 PM
I worry the entire country will face a reckoning in the not very distant future. Infrastructure isn't the only industry where cost inflation has been way out of hand with the "Core CPI" figure. Cost inflation in Health Care, Higher Education and (lately) Housing has been ridiculous. I worry the current housing bubble is getting a lot worse than the one in the mid 2000's. This shit is just not sustainable.

We're in the early stages of what could be a slow-rolling disaster in generation demographics. Simply put: America is well on its way to having too many elderly people and not enough working age taxpayers to both staff and sustain so many systems we take for granted. China is getting into deep shit over this very situation. America has various industries that have been price gouging the public for a long time. I think their gravy train will come to a screeching halt within the next 10-20 years. A shrinking work force won't be able to afford massive tax hikes and price hikes to cover those costs.

America's railroad industry has been "decommissioning" tens of thousands of miles worth of existing track for decades. They're still ripping out more old track than they are laying down new rail lines. We might start seeing that with our highways.

We have an ace up our sleeve on demographics in that, despite our problems, the US is still the most desirable country in the world to immigrate to.  My wife's family came to this country back in the 80's to escape Communism (re-education) in SE Asia, and have been without exception a net gain for the US with their work and educational ethic.  We can import workers at whatever rate we politically deem appropriate to fix that issue.  Trick is, to tailor the policy to increase immigration to the needed skillset to fill the gaps in what we can't domestically grow to fill.  Now, that's not to say that just because we can means we will.  Politics, of course, being what it is.

Quote from: MikieTimT on January 04, 2024, 06:23:26 AM

Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 03, 2024, 11:15:00 PM
I worry the entire country will face a reckoning in the not very distant future. Infrastructure isn't the only industry where cost inflation has been way out of hand with the "Core CPI" figure. Cost inflation in Health Care, Higher Education and (lately) Housing has been ridiculous. I worry the current housing bubble is getting a lot worse than the one in the mid 2000's. This shit is just not sustainable.

We're in the early stages of what could be a slow-rolling disaster in generation demographics. Simply put: America is well on its way to having too many elderly people and not enough working age taxpayers to both staff and sustain so many systems we take for granted. China is getting into deep shit over this very situation. America has various industries that have been price gouging the public for a long time. I think their gravy train will come to a screeching halt within the next 10-20 years. A shrinking work force won't be able to afford massive tax hikes and price hikes to cover those costs.

America's railroad industry has been "decommissioning" tens of thousands of miles worth of existing track for decades. They're still ripping out more old track than they are laying down new rail lines. We might start seeing that with our highways.

We have an ace up our sleeve on demographics in that, despite our problems, the US is still the most desirable country in the world to immigrate to.  My wife's family came to this country back in the 80's to escape Communism (re-education) in SE Asia, and have been without exception a net gain for the US with their work and educational ethic.  We can import workers at whatever rate we politically deem appropriate to fix that issue.  Trick is, to tailor the policy to increase immigration to the needed skillset to fill the gaps in what we can't domestically grow to fill.  Now, that's not to say that just because we can means we will.  Politics, of course, being what it is.

Our immigration policy favors highly educated and those with exceptional means.
The number of political refugees is lower and many of them fall into the well-educated group.  We have no real appetite to train US workers and allow in a group of new workers who will start from the bottom up. The primary basis of this is the way we pay for higher education and the regressive welfare system.

Anyone who suggests that inflation is low has not recently bought a car or light truck, paid rent or bought a house. or paid college tuition fees, room & board.)  BTW when we compare inflation of college from before 1965, we are comparing apples to oranges. The cost of college circa 1960 was tuition, fees, room & board. Today it is GENERALLY stated as the cost of tuition (and maybe fees) plus an underestimated amount for textbooks.

Quote from: MikieTimTWe have an ace up our sleeve on demographics in that, despite our problems, the US is still the most desirable country in the world to immigrate to.

There is a chance that could change.

For the past 50 years nearly all the net population gains in the US have come via immigration. Since the early 1970's the birth rates of American-born women across all races hovered near replacement level (2.1 children per female). In the mid 2000's it dropped below 2.0 and has been slowly trending farther down since then. Some currently worsening conditions are increasing the chances for total fertility rates in American-born women to just utterly crash. We could be down there with China and South Korea.

Historically, the US has taken its status as the top destination for people to emigrate totally for granted. We imported big numbers of Chinese workers to help build up our railroads; then our government turned around and passed the Chinese Exclusion Act. That's how we roll. We have a bunch of industries and institutions that are very dependent on both illegal and legal immigration. If we deported every illegal immigrant in the US our agriculture industry and various others literally wouldn't be able to function. If we blocked every H1B Visa our top universities and technology companies would be hurting badly.

Many of our colleges, especially the most prestigious ones, have gotten fat and greedy off educating foreign-born students from families with money. One recent trend: a growing number of these students are getting their degrees and then taking their skills back home or to another country. China is going through a "brain drain" due the nation's increasingly authoritarian policies and worsening economic outlook. Those high skilled workers aren't automatically coming to the US. Many are going to Europe or staying closer to home in other Asian countries.

Young Americans are growing increasingly disillusioned about the value of a college degree. Many of them are not worth the parchment on which they're printed. Several skilled trades can offer better, more steady paychecks. It's possible to make decent money as a plumber, electrician or mechanic and not have any crushing student loan debt. Universities have enjoyed a bubble economy of sorts for far too long.

The "de-coupling" trend now affecting international trade has big companies moving production to more friendly and stable locations, preferably closer to home. Mexico is one such near-shoring site. If the trend takes off in a big way it's going to draw a lot of Mexican-born workers back home. With anti-immigrant sentiment growing ever more heated and angry in the US that will make it more likely for such workers to look for any opportunity to return home.

Quote from: bwana39Anyone who suggests that inflation is low has not recently bought a car or light truck, paid rent or bought a house. or paid college tuition fees, room & board.)

Throw in the crushing prices of health care and day care. It's a perfect recipe to convince lots of adults in their 20's and 30's to avoid having children.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 04, 2024, 03:13:20 PM

Young Americans are growing increasingly disillusioned about the value of a college degree. Many of them are not worth the parchment on which they're printed. Several skilled trades can o's. ffer better, more steady paychecks. It's possible to make decent money as a plumber, electrician or mechanic and not have any crushing student loan debt. Universities have enjoyed a bubble economy of sorts for far too long.



Throw in the crushing prices of health care and day care. It's a perfect recipe to convince lots of adults in their 20's and 30's to avoid having children.

Day care costs have not changed relatively since the 1980's/ My wife could not afford to work when our kids were little. THis is is part of the problem we have with generational poverty. Single parents cannot afford to work or are limited in when (and how much) they can work because of the cost of paying for daycare.

Much of the problem with the value of degrees is that the workplace is looking for specific vocational skills. (Programming, accounting, etc.) Our colleges and universities are still turning out liberal arts graduates. It used to be that any degree would open doors. That is just not the case any more. Our graduate degree programs that truly impart useable skills (generally) are so expensive much of our grad school enrolment is either international students (often paying US, in-state tuition or even on full scholarship) or first generation immigrants whose family will pauper themselves to provide the education. Students get degrees in radio-tv. The jobs (few) pay near minimums. The graduates FAR outstrip the demand and therefore the wages WILL NOT pay the student loan cost. This far from the only degree. 

I will add this; our students are spoiled. They expect to live in a single occupant room. preferably off-campus, party, have pets, and borrow to cover most if not all of it.  Parents, even those who nominally plan for it are really NOT prepared for it. Even if you have tuition paid, the costs of the fees, room and board, and just living expenses are beyond the ability of many of not most to pay without borrowing.  If you truly qualify for FISL's you probably will have to pay for 100% of them yourself. You parents as a whole are not going to be able to pay for them.

Many of the international students will live 8-10 in a 600 sf apartment. Many universities have 4-6 additional students covertly living in a dorm room intended for just two. 

In most Texas state universities if ANY student regardless of background (out of state or international) gets as little as $500. a semester in scholarship money, they get in-state tuition. 

Finally, I agree with you about the trades paying better than many degreed jobs. Most of the skilled craftsmen are over 45. There is and will be a large demand in the coming years. The problem is convincing upper 1/4 HS graduates that there is not more gold over the college rainbow. THese jobs are highly technical. People who struggled or didn't try and got nothing in high school will likely lack the math and science skills (and maybe the reasoning ability) to do well as a skilled craftsman.

Quote from: bwana39Day care costs have not changed relatively since the 1980's/ My wife could not afford to work when our kids were little.

Day care costs in the US are now averaging over $12,000 per year for a single infant and nearly $10,000 per year for a pre-schooler. My town isn't a high income location; a rates were around $80 per week per child a decade ago. Now local day care facilities are charging rates between $120 and $200 per week. In bigger cities with high costs of living the rates are even higher. A large number of day care facilities closed in recent years. The pandemic was one culprit for that. That helped push prices higher and create long wait lists. The situation is forcing more mothers to stay home. Women who don't yet have kids, but want to have a career, make their own money, etc are going to take steps to protect that earning power.

Quote from: bwana39This is is part of the problem we have with generational poverty. Single parents cannot afford to work or are limited in when (and how much) they can work because of the cost of paying for daycare.

Single mothers have been in the catch-22 situation for a long time. Work even just a little bit in a crappy, low-wage service industry job and *poof* any government assistance gets greatly reduced. The situation is common knowledge to any young woman of child-bearing age. They know each kid they have is going to dig them into an even deeper financial hole. Teens and young adults are getting pretty good at not getting pregnant in the first place.

Quote from: bwana39Our colleges and universities are still turning out liberal arts graduates. It used to be that any degree would open doors. That is just not the case any more.

This all gets back to the compound problems we have in public education. America doesn't value teaching as a profession very much any more. Talented people who would make great teachers choose a career with better pay and less stress. America has no uniform standards on curriculum. I know this personally, having grown up as a Marine Corps brat and attending numerous public schools in different parts of the nation. There are vast differences in quality from one school district to the next. Now the problem is getting worse with charter schools, politics, etc. Even in a ideal situation the students (and their parents) must pull their own weight too.

It's no wonder America's technology sector, engineering sector and medical sector rely greatly on a lot of foreign-born talent. To be fair, America has historically relied on a lot of imported brain power..

Too many of our native born kids are choosing study fields they consider "easy" or "cool" rather than pick something more challenging and with better money-making potential. But even if our native-born kids do have the smarts to be a computer scientist or structural engineer they may get financially shut out by the sheer high costs of college. Universities love accepting foreign-born students because they can appear "progressive" by doing so and then make more profit by those students paying more.

Most good-paying skilled trade jobs are dirty and physically demanding. Offices are clean and typically air conditioned.

Looks like the I-10 Calcasieu River Bridge project is back on track again.


KPLC-TV, the NBC affiliate in Lake Charles, has an article at its website page on Governor Jeff Landry announcing an agreement on a new revised contract between the state and Calcasieu Bridge Partners, the private firm designing and constructing the bridge replacement, which has the full support of local legislators. They had originally in June rejected a previous proposed contract due to their opposition to the toll rates, especially for larger trucks and locally registered vehicles.


The new agreement cuts the toll rate for large trucks from $12.50 to $8.25, and adds a small $0.25 toll for all locally registered vehicles within the 5 parish Lake Charles MPO area (Calcasieu, Cameron, Jeff Davis, Beauregard, Allen); Payments would be collected either by GeauxPass transponders available free of charge to locals (or for a small fee for HOV 3+ drivers) or billed through the mail. Medium sized trucks/trailers would pay the same rate as with the previous failed agreement ($2.55).


The other major change is that under the new agreement, Imperial Calcasieu, the public agency representing the MPO, would have a 15% stake in the profits from tolling, meaning that the MPO would get 15% of any profits gained from tolls on the new bridge, with no liability on losses. The profits could be used to reduce further the tolls on the bridge, or used for other projects within the area.


The agreement still has to be approved by the Port of Lake Charles ruling committee, and the same legislative committee that rejected the original agreement, but with such universal support this time from the Lake Charles delegation, it's basically a done deal.


Credit where credit's due. Good job, Gov. Now, do that same thing for the Lafayette Connector and I-49 South. No tolls this time, though.




KPLC article on new Calcasieu River Bridge agreement (https://www.kplctv.com/2024/01/19/live-gov-landry-announces-new-proposal-i-10-bridge-over-calcasieu/)

Ugh.  From a NY perspective, allowing MPOs a "piece of the pie" is foolhardy and could result in poor programming of those funds instead of keeping them in authority or State hands.

MPOs have legislative control over some federal funds.  Just offering up control over other funding is going to be a source of regret in the future.

(and it's Imperial Calcasieu, not Imperial Louisiana...although I have yet to see how exactly it "represents the MPO")

My only comment would be - LaDOTD should seriously consider accepting E-ZPass / TxTag transponders on this project. I-10 is a major east-west corridor connecting the E-ZPass states in the east (the entire east coast, except South Carolina, uses E-ZPass I believe) and a mega TxTag state to the west, and sees a significant amount of out of state, long haul traveling. Hitting everyone non-local with a toll-by-plate situation seems problematic.

The tolling situation with the Calcasieu River Bridge is yet another example why we need a nationwide toll tag standard. That was supposed to happen years ago. It looks like no progress is being made at all in that direction.

Motorists taking road trips across multiple states face bad choices. They can have more than one RFID transponder in their vehicle and risk being double-charged on some toll roads. Or they can go with a single toll tag and get price-gouged by higher pay-by-plate fees on toll roads that don't support their toll tag. Here in Oklahoma the pay-by-plate fees are roughly double that of the PikePass rate. One national toll tag standard would solve those problems.

Unfortunately, even a nationwide toll standard wouldn't stop price gouging.  Just look at all the transponder discrimination in E-ZPass-land.  Travel the Thruway with an E-ZPass issued outside NY?  You're stuck paying the pay by plate rate.

Another interesting thing on that front that may be relevant: the furthest south "native" E-ZPass state is Virginia.  North Carolina, Georgia, and Florida all accept E-ZPass (and have varying degrees of their transponders being accepted in turn), but maintain separate transponder systems (contrast to Illinois, which maintains its own branding, but is fully part of the system).  Although North Carolina is an odd case, as it was interoperable with both E-ZPass and SunPass since inception.  So saying "Florida is an E-ZPass state" might not be the motivation one would think.

Quote from: Rothman on January 21, 2024, 11:13:25 PM
Ugh.  From a NY perspective, allowing MPOs a "piece of the pie" is foolhardy and could result in poor programming of those funds instead of keeping them in authority or State hands.

MPOs have legislative control over some federal funds.  Just offering up control over other funding is going to be a source of regret in the future.

(and it's Imperial Calcasieu, not Imperial Louisiana...although I have yet to see how exactly it "represents the MPO")

I assumed that Imperial Calcasieu was the representative for the Lake Charles area MPO. My fault on that one. Original post has been corrected.

They did say that IC would get that 15% share of the toll take; they didn't say whether the toll would be administered by LADOTD, Calcasieu Bridge Partners, or GeauxPass. That's probably still to be determined.

I thought that GeauxPass was compatible with EZPass and other transponder services. You'd think with so many Texans travelling through, they'd consider allowing such compatibility....although, given that they had to reduce the tolls for the locals, I'm sure they don't want to lose any more revenue to the outsiders using the bridge. Let them shunpike over to I-210 or LA 12/US 190 through DeQuincy and Kinder, I suppose.

Quote from: vdeane on January 22, 2024, 12:45:54 PM
Unfortunately, even a nationwide toll standard wouldn't stop price gouging.  Just look at all the transponder discrimination in E-ZPass-land.  Travel the Thruway with an E-ZPass issued outside NY?  You're stuck paying the pay by plate rate.

True, but at least it can still be handled under one system. I traveled on I-90 a few months ago in upstate NY (beautiful drive, by the way), sure I payed a higher toll rate, but it was all under my Virginia E-ZPass account. I didn't have to worry about waiting for a bill in the mail, going online, and paying it. It was done seamlessly.

Quote from: Anthony_JK on January 22, 2024, 03:38:49 PM
They did say that IC would get that 15% share of the toll take; they didn't say whether the toll would be administered by LADOTD, Calcasieu Bridge Partners, or GeauxPass. That's probably still to be determined.

I'm not sure how I feel about this... 15%? Why isn't all of the toll revenue going towards repaying the debt that paid for the bridge? Now a local transportation planning organization is collecting straight revenue off of it? - which means tolls will stay on even longer in the future.

Quote
I thought that GeauxPass was compatible with EZPass and other transponder services. You'd think with so many Texans travelling through, they'd consider allowing such compatibility....although, given that they had to reduce the tolls for the locals, I'm sure they don't want to lose any more revenue to the outsiders using the bridge. Let them shunpike over to I-210 or LA 12/US 190 through DeQuincy and Kinder, I suppose.

I'm sure a good amount will use I-210... it's not out of the way and will avoid the hassle off toll by plate. E-ZPass and TxTag are not compatible with GeauxPass, and they ought to at least accept those two transponders on the bridge.

Speaking in general here - Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas have toll interoperability, and the entire east coast, and even into the midwest has E-ZPass compatibility (19 states)... they ought to join and create a single interoperability network - along with Louisiana if this toll bridge is built. SunPass Pro is the only transponder currently that allows this - it provides interoperability with E-ZPass and the TxTag network.

Quote from: sprjus4 on January 22, 2024, 04:52:45 PM
Speaking in general here - Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas have toll interoperability, and the entire east coast, and even into the midwest has E-ZPass compatibility (19 states)... they ought to join and create a single interoperability network - along with Louisiana if this toll bridge is built. SunPass Pro is the only transponder currently that allows this - it provides interoperability with E-ZPass and the TxTag network.

They ought to, but it's not happening because the two of them use totally different equipment, and neither region wants to be the one to sink money into replacing everything to be compatible with the other. (I don't know if it's still the case, but at one point E-ZPass had the bigger install base but more antiquated equipment. So TX/OK/KS didn't want to spend money on what is effectively a downgrade from their perspective, and E-ZPass didn't want to change because they felt the system with more users shouldn't have to change to accommodate for compatibility with the system with fewer users.)

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 22, 2024, 06:32:13 PM

Quote from: sprjus4 on January 22, 2024, 04:52:45 PM
Speaking in general here - Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas have toll interoperability, and the entire east coast, and even into the midwest has E-ZPass compatibility (19 states)... they ought to join and create a single interoperability network - along with Louisiana if this toll bridge is built. SunPass Pro is the only transponder currently that allows this - it provides interoperability with E-ZPass and the TxTag network.

They ought to, but it's not happening because the two of them use totally different equipment, and neither region wants to be the one to sink money into replacing everything to be compatible with the other. (I don't know if it's still the case, but at one point E-ZPass had the bigger install base but more antiquated equipment. So TX/OK/KS didn't want to spend money on what is effectively a downgrade from their perspective, and E-ZPass didn't want to change because they felt the system with more users shouldn't have to change to accommodate for compatibility with the system with fewer users.)

Couldn't E-ZPass and/or TX/OK/KS roll out a new version of their perspective passes that has the ability to read the technology from both sets of equipment?

Florida has the SunPass Pro that can work with both the E-ZPass and TX/OK/KS systems, whereas the standard SunPass doesn't even work outside of FL/GA/NC I believe.

I have seen a blurb (https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/i-pass-illinois-tollway-transponder-sticker-date-2024/3324262/) to the effect that the Illinois Tollway is phasing out the current soap-bar I-Pass in favor of a sticker.  It is supposed to maintain interoperability with other E-ZPass agencies, though I don't know whether this means a protocol change has come to E-ZPassland, or whether protocol convergence will form the future basis of interoperability with the Texas/Oklahoma/Kansas zone.

Quote from: sprjus4 on January 22, 2024, 06:36:35 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 22, 2024, 06:32:13 PM

Quote from: sprjus4 on January 22, 2024, 04:52:45 PM
Speaking in general here - Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas have toll interoperability, and the entire east coast, and even into the midwest has E-ZPass compatibility (19 states)... they ought to join and create a single interoperability network - along with Louisiana if this toll bridge is built. SunPass Pro is the only transponder currently that allows this - it provides interoperability with E-ZPass and the TxTag network.

They ought to, but it's not happening because the two of them use totally different equipment, and neither region wants to be the one to sink money into replacing everything to be compatible with the other. (I don't know if it's still the case, but at one point E-ZPass had the bigger install base but more antiquated equipment. So TX/OK/KS didn't want to spend money on what is effectively a downgrade from their perspective, and E-ZPass didn't want to change because they felt the system with more users shouldn't have to change to accommodate for compatibility with the system with fewer users.)

Couldn't E-ZPass and/or TX/OK/KS roll out a new version of their perspective passes that has the ability to read the technology from both sets of equipment?

They could. They don't really want to, though. It would cost money (rule #1 of running a government agency in Oklahoma is never spend money on anything ever for any reason), and I doubt the political leadership in Texas and Oklahoma imagines any resident of their state would ever stoop so low as to visit [shudder] Chicago or New York. "Don't y'all know you get shot two hundred and thirteen times every millisecond any time you're in Chicago city limits?" I hear them saying.

Meanwhile, in Texas, it seems like just about anyone can create their own toll highway authority, at any time, for any reason. I'm fairly sure there are hairdressers, dogs, and cow pastures with their own toll highway authorities in Texas. It's hard getting all of those toll authorities just to accept the Texas tag, much less one from commie E-ZPass land.

Poor Kansas is just along for the ride on this one.

Quote from: J N Winkler on January 22, 2024, 07:06:29 PM
I have seen a blurb (https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/i-pass-illinois-tollway-transponder-sticker-date-2024/3324262/) to the effect that the Illinois Tollway is phasing out the current soap-bar I-Pass in favor of a sticker.  It is supposed to maintain interoperability with other E-ZPass agencies, though I don't know whether this means a protocol change has come to E-ZPassland, or whether protocol convergence will form the future basis of interoperability with the Texas/Oklahoma/Kansas zone.

There might have been.  The MassPike went with mainline gantries for their AET conversion, and the Pennsylvania Turnpike did too.  Even the Thruway's hybrid system uses back-office processing to figure out where people went on the virtual ticket systems (and with respect to the exit 24-25A free ride) instead of the old way of having the transponder record where you entered and relay that back to the exit toll barrier (that's one of the reasons tolls take so long for the Thruway to process these days).

Quote from: Anthony_JK on January 22, 2024, 03:38:49 PM

Quote from: Rothman on January 21, 2024, 11:13:25 PM
Ugh.  From a NY perspective, allowing MPOs a "piece of the pie" is foolhardy and could result in poor programming of those funds instead of keeping them in authority or State hands.

MPOs have legislative control over some federal funds.  Just offering up control over other funding is going to be a source of regret in the future.

(and it's Imperial Calcasieu, not Imperial Louisiana...although I have yet to see how exactly it "represents the MPO")

I assumed that Imperial Calcasieu was the representative for the Lake Charles area MPO. My fault on that one. Original post has been corrected.

They did say that IC would get that 15% share of the toll take; they didn't say whether the toll would be administered by LADOTD, Calcasieu Bridge Partners, or GeauxPass. That's probably still to be determined.

I thought that GeauxPass was compatible with EZPass and other transponder services. You'd think with so many Texans travelling through, they'd consider allowing such compatibility....although, given that they had to reduce the tolls for the locals, I'm sure they don't want to lose any more revenue to the outsiders using the bridge. Let them shunpike over to I-210 or LA 12/US 190 through DeQuincy and Kinder, I suppose.

Not sure why an MPO would even need representation at all, come to think of it.

The trend of infrastructure costs dramatically outpacing core inflation rates and income growth will eventually yield dire consequences.

Infrastructure costs are significantly higher in metros like NYC and LA, but the rising costs are getting passed down across all of the nation. Small towns and rural areas with aging populations and shrinking tax bases will be less able to pay for upkeep on streets, county roads, bridges, etc. These same areas struggle to afford police departments, emergency response service (fire/medical) and public schools. Reduced ability to afford street maintenance will help speed up the depopulating process in those areas.

There is a gravitational pull drawing people to larger metro areas. But land, housing and other living costs are higher there. Infrastructure costs in those locations will keep rising. Eventually something is going to have to give. Simple math does NOT support this bullshit going on forever.

The looming "silver tsunami" in residential real estate that is due to hit around 2040 could be a lot worse than economic forecasters are predicting. These guys are counting on a whole lot of people in Generation Z and younger to buy up all the homes Baby Boomers leave behind when they want to downsize. Not everyone in Gen Z needs a 3000 square foot McMansion. Many of them aren't getting married or having kids. So they don't need all that extra space. They probably won't want those high utility bills and property taxes either. Many of those big homes will need tens of thousands in repairs too. 20 years from now I think there will be a glut of huge yet unwanted homes sitting empty. The streets servicing those homes will be far less used. I think smaller homes that cost less to own and maintain will be a lot more popular in the future. That will make a big impact on city planning issues like street funding and maintenance.

Quote from: vdeane on January 22, 2024, 08:58:10 PM

Quote from: J N Winkler on January 22, 2024, 07:06:29 PM
I have seen a blurb (https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/i-pass-illinois-tollway-transponder-sticker-date-2024/3324262/) to the effect that the Illinois Tollway is phasing out the current soap-bar I-Pass in favor of a sticker.  It is supposed to maintain interoperability with other E-ZPass agencies, though I don't know whether this means a protocol change has come to E-ZPassland, or whether protocol convergence will form the future basis of interoperability with the Texas/Oklahoma/Kansas zone.

There might have been.  The MassPike went with mainline gantries for their AET conversion, and the Pennsylvania Turnpike did too.  Even the Thruway's hybrid system uses back-office processing to figure out where people went on the virtual ticket systems (and with respect to the exit 24-25A free ride) instead of the old way of having the transponder record where you entered and relay that back to the exit toll barrier (that's one of the reasons tolls take so long for the Thruway to process these days).

I don't believe ezpass tags are that smart to relay anything beyond their serial number to the reader.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 23, 2024, 01:45:32 PM
The trend of infrastructure costs dramatically outpacing core inflation rates and income growth will eventually yield dire consequences.

Infrastructure costs are significantly higher in metros like NYC and LA, but the rising costs are getting passed down across all of the nation. Small towns and rural areas with aging populations and shrinking tax bases will be less able to pay for upkeep on streets, county roads, bridges, etc. These same areas struggle to afford police departments, emergency response service (fire/medical) and public schools. Reduced ability to afford street maintenance will help speed up the depopulating process in those areas.

There is a gravitational pull drawing people to larger metro areas. But land, housing and other living costs are higher there. Infrastructure costs in those locations will keep rising. Eventually something is going to have to give. Simple math does NOT support this bullshit going on forever.

The looming "silver tsunami" in residential real estate that is due to hit around 2040 could be a lot worse than economic forecasters are predicting. These guys are counting on a whole lot of people in Generation Z and younger to buy up all the homes Baby Boomers leave behind when they want to downsize. Not everyone in Gen Z needs a 3000 square foot McMansion. Many of them aren't getting married or having kids. So they don't need all that extra space. They probably won't want those high utility bills and property taxes either. Many of those big homes will need tens of thousands in repairs too. 20 years from now I think there will be a glut of huge yet unwanted homes sitting empty. The streets servicing those homes will be far less used. I think smaller homes that cost less to own and maintain will be a lot more popular in the future. That will make a big impact on city planning issues like street funding and maintenance.

And doubtful that Gen Z will be much interested in purchasing 1970s-style homes with dark brick, little natural light, and wood paneled walls even if they wanted to buy a house.

Actually, I'm talking about all the "modern" McMansions that have been built since the 1990's. Baby Boomers have been the primary buyers of such houses. Not nearly as many of the buyers are in the Generation X group. Millennials have been screwed badly coming of age at the wrong time. So the real estate industry is counting on younger generations to buy up all that inventory the Boomers leave behind. That's not going to automatically happen.

We actually have another "too big to fail" problem looming in housing: all the "institutional" buyers that have been gobbling up residential real estate. Their activity has been putting a hard floor under these high housing prices. Still, math is math. And the current situation does not balance in the black at all. When this housing bubble finally pops all these big institutional buyers are going to go running to Uncle Sam begging for a bail out.

Quote from: sprjus4 on January 21, 2024, 11:41:43 PM
My only comment would be - LaDOTD should seriously consider accepting E-ZPass / TxTag transponders on this project. I-10 is a major east-west corridor connecting the E-ZPass states in the east (the entire east coast, except South Carolina, uses E-ZPass I believe) and a mega TxTag state to the west, and sees a significant amount of out of state, long haul traveling. Hitting everyone non-local with a toll-by-plate situation seems problematic.

"Texas as a TXTag State". As I have said other places, The NTTA TollTag was the first of the three tags in Texas. The HCTRA EZ Tag came next. It ORIGINALLY was going to adopt the EZPass technology, but due to the lower implementation costs, went with the same platform as the TollTag. Lastly came the TxTag.

My reasoning for being like I am about it, is because people searching for a Texas tag might think of this as an endorsement or that the TxTag is the defacto choice. The raw numbers are that NTTA has over 4 million tags issued, HCTRA has about 3.6 million, and the TXTag is a little over 3 million.  All of them have identical toll road interoperability and the TollTag can be used for DFW Airport as well.

The TxTag has terrible customer service. NTTA (TollTag) has better customer service, easier replacement, etc. The EZTag (HCTRA) is last place. They charge for cards, have a higher initial deposit, and just in general suck.  HCTRA is part of the Harris County Government. It is like dealing with well...the government.

Quote from: bwana39 on January 24, 2024, 11:59:15 AM

Quote from: sprjus4 on January 21, 2024, 11:41:43 PM
My only comment would be - LaDOTD should seriously consider accepting E-ZPass / TxTag transponders on this project. I-10 is a major east-west corridor connecting the E-ZPass states in the east (the entire east coast, except South Carolina, uses E-ZPass I believe) and a mega TxTag state to the west, and sees a significant amount of out of state, long haul traveling. Hitting everyone non-local with a toll-by-plate situation seems problematic.

"Texas as a TXTag State". As I have said other places, The NTTA TollTag was the first of the three tags in Texas. The HCTRA EZ Tag came next. It ORIGINALLY was going to adopt the EZPass technology, but due to the lower implementation costs, went with the same platform as the TollTag. Lastly came the TxTag.

My reasoning for being like I am about it, is because people searching for a Texas tag might think of this as an endorsement or that the TxTag is the defacto choice. The raw numbers are that NTTA has over 4 million tags issued, HCTRA has about 3.6 million, and the TXTag is a little over 3 million.  All of them have identical toll road interoperability and the TollTag can be used for DFW Airport as well.

The TxTag has terrible customer service. NTTA (TollTag) has better customer service, easier replacement, etc. The EZTag (HCTRA) is last place. They charge for cards, have a higher initial deposit, and just in general suck.  HCTRA is part of the Harris County Government. It is like dealing with well...the government.

I got a TxTag back in 2021 and used it quite a few times in Kansas and across Texas (Dallas, Austin, Houston) and never had any issues with it at the time. Granted, it's been a couple of years...

Either way, I'm not "endorsing" one particular tag. They all work across the state, and ought to all be interoperable with the E-ZPass network.

i can tell you people what actually needs to happen:
at the federal level, a radical raise in gas taxes and a EV charging tax built inot the gas taxes, on top of it, gas taxes should be mandated to raise per year based on construction costs. on top of it, EIS studies should be restricted to 1 year, not 3, but at the same time the local public should also chime in.
and basic education on infrastructure costs should be made mandatory to graduate high school, among the basics on how our infrastructure works in the country and tolls should be allowed everywhere and even mandated for bridges and tunnels, among other big and expensive infrastructure projects.
at the state level, it should be the same, but more localized within the states, and the counties should all be able to have a lot of leeway regarding raises to sales and gas taxation.
in tennessee for example, counties aren't allowed to raise gas taxes for local infrastructure projects, its the same for sales taxes. it sucks but that can only work for so long.

Quote from: civilengineeringnerd on January 25, 2024, 03:23:38 AM
and tolls should be allowed everywhere and even mandated for bridges and tunnels, among other big and expensive infrastructure projects.

Then what is the point of raising the gas tax? Shouldn't that cover what tolls would? Why both?

Quote from: civilengineeringnerdbasic education on infrastructure costs should be made mandatory to graduate high school

No. The thing that actually needs to happen (especially if there would be a giant hike in gasoline and EV charging taxes) is the highway industry needs to provide a full accounting to explain why their costs have long outstripped the pace of inflation. These guys are operating with a blank check.

My own paycheck hasn't been going up and up and up like that. But I need to pay a lot more in taxes so these other guys can keep taking more and more money? F*** that.

The idea that high school students need an education on infrastructure costs sounds pretty silly. Are they also going to take classes on the cost structures of the health care industry or the military? Sounds like a way to spread pro-industry propaganda.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 25, 2024, 08:26:15 AM

Quote from: civilengineeringnerdbasic education on infrastructure costs should be made mandatory to graduate high school

No. The thing that actually needs to happen (especially if there would be a giant hike in gasoline and EV charging taxes) is the highway industry needs to provide a full accounting to explain why their costs have long outstripped the pace of inflation. These guys are operating with a blank check.

This statement is one made out of a certain level of ignorance and an overly simplistic view of how the CPI works when it comes to inflation (I mean, take any industry sector and its own inflation rate will be out of whack with the CPI).

What, you don't think DOT's do bid analyses at the project level and market analyses at the program level?  DOTs review every low bid, item by item, against market conditions.

And it isn't like the "transportation industry" is monolithic.  Think of everything that must come together for a project to be built -- labor, engineering, materials, expertise...Businesses hiring businesses to get the job done, so the effects on cost are not simple.

Certainly, regulation has increased design costs over time.  But, those regulations are here to stay, since getting rid of them means you're against preserving the environment (NEPA), historical features (federal/state historical regs, Section 106...), recreational areas (4f), etc., etc.

However, contractors have mostly pointed at material costs as the main culprit behind construction inflation, especially with steel and asphalt.

So, great, now that you have an idea behind what's behind inflation in the construction industry, what is to be done about it?  Build bridges without steel?  Build roads without asphalt?  Just bulldoze a freeway through your neighborhood without your input (people tend to forget that public outreach is from and not separate from NEPA)?  Perhaps we should go back to the days when DOTs could just kick people out of their homes indiscriminately to save on ROW costs...

Anyway, the more I hear about "runaway inflation" arguments, the more I question if they're really disingenuous given the realities.

Standards have also changed over time.  In Kansas, for example, Portland cement concrete pavement eight to ten inches deep was used for the free Interstates when they were built; now, to secure greater durability, 12 inches is the norm.  Any relocation of a two-lane highway is going to be much more expensive in real terms than the original facility, because it will have full shoulders and much more forgiving geometry (means much more earthmoving and culvert construction).  Nearly all of these translate to larger quantities of bid items falling into categories such as earthmoving, concrete, asphalt, steel, etc. where unit costs have also risen.

The issue is the level of precision they are trying to achieve. The engineering os to the point an xrayed section with the rebar 1/2" off would have to be dug up and redone. The state DOT's have more engineers per lane mile now than they did in the 1960's and back then, they designed the roads. Now contractors (consultants) do all the engineering the DOT's just check and verify.

A road in 1975 that would have had to be within 12" in a 300' run now has to be within 1" or less.  The chemical analysis of materials is consistently increasing and the plants that process concrete and asphalt have to have chemists or engineers test what a lab tech or even a plant operator did before.

If the quality were improved or if the costs were decreasing, I would applaud the microengineering and technical analysis. The problem is they aren't. The quality is many cases is worse and the costs are spiraling. The pre-construction engineering costs have increased to nearly 1 Million dollars per road mile.

The steeper construction costs also translate to higher stakes for design choices, such as how to waterproof subgrades.  When it relocated US 50 between Walton and Florence in the 1990's, upgrading it from asphalt with no shoulders and (probably) 11-foot lanes to Portland cement concrete with full structural shoulders and 12-foot lanes, Kansas DOT made the expensive mistake of using a sealant to try to prevent water intrusion.  It did not work, and the road has required frequent repair ever since to address slab cracking.

Quote from: bwana39 on January 25, 2024, 06:20:57 PM
The issue is the level of precision they are trying to achieve. The engineering os to the point an xrayed section with the rebar 1/2" off would have to be dug up and redone. The state DOT's have more engineers per lane mile now than they did in the 1960's and back then, they designed the roads. Now contractors (consultants) do all the engineering the DOT's just check and verify.

A road in 1975 that would have had to be within 12" in a 300' run now has to be within 1" or less.  The chemical analysis of materials is consistently increasing and the plants that process concrete and asphalt have to have chemists or engineers test what a lab tech or even a plant operator did before.

If the quality were improved or if the costs were decreasing, I would applaud the microengineering and technical analysis. The problem is they aren't. The quality is many cases is worse and the costs are spiraling. The pre-construction engineering costs have increased to nearly 1 Million dollars per road mile.

Regarding your first paragraph, DOTs rely upon consultants for more complex, large projects, but the bulk of the quantity of projects is still done in-house: Most paving projects and smaller bridge replacements and rehabs, etc., etc.  I think there is some pressure from lobbyists to move that line down to have more consultants to do the work, which will raise engineering costs.

Regarding your second paragraph, it is unthinkable nowadays to have a DOT be off by a large distance due to ROW rights.  You want that old buffer, then let it apply in front of your house.

Regarding your third paragraph, $1m per mile is not an accurate summary measure of the cost.  With the emphasis on "complete streets" and smart growth, where DOTs must take into account sidewalks and other bike/ped considerations...along with drainage, if a heavier treatment is desired, sure, engineering is going to take a bite.  But then you have vendor-in-place paving where the engineering is nil.  To say that the extra consideration for pedestrian traffic for heavier treatments is not a quality improvement is not a defendable position.  I have yet to experience a project through a settled area where a locality just said, "Yeah, forget about the sidewalks/crossings/trails/bike routes in the area near our crumbling road and just get it paved."

Quote from: Rothman on January 25, 2024, 09:56:47 PM

Quote from: bwana39 on January 25, 2024, 06:20:57 PM
The issue is the level of precision they are trying to achieve. The engineering os to the point an xrayed section with the rebar 1/2" off would have to be dug up and redone. The state DOT's have more engineers per lane mile now than they did in the 1960's and back then, they designed the roads. Now contractors (consultants) do all the engineering the DOT's just check and verify.

A road in 1975 that would have had to be within 12" in a 300' run now has to be within 1" or less.  The chemical analysis of materials is consistently increasing and the plants that process concrete and asphalt have to have chemists or engineers test what a lab tech or even a plant operator did before.

If the quality were improved or if the costs were decreasing, I would applaud the microengineering and technical analysis. The problem is they aren't. The quality is many cases is worse and the costs are spiraling. The pre-construction engineering costs have increased to nearly 1 Million dollars per road mile.

Regarding your first paragraph, DOTs rely upon consultants for more complex, large projects, but the bulk of the quantity of projects is still done in-house: Most paving projects and smaller bridge replacements and rehabs, etc., etc.  I think there is some pressure from lobbyists to move that line down to have more consultants to do the work, which will raise engineering costs.

Add pressure from your state lawmakers "to do more with less" by cutting FTE counts regardless of the need; thereby forcing DOTs to contract out more and more work.

Quote from: rte66man on January 27, 2024, 03:02:18 PM

Quote from: Rothman on January 25, 2024, 09:56:47 PM

Quote from: bwana39 on January 25, 2024, 06:20:57 PM
The issue is the level of precision they are trying to achieve. The engineering os to the point an xrayed section with the rebar 1/2" off would have to be dug up and redone. The state DOT's have more engineers per lane mile now than they did in the 1960's and back then, they designed the roads. Now contractors (consultants) do all the engineering the DOT's just check and verify.

A road in 1975 that would have had to be within 12" in a 300' run now has to be within 1" or less.  The chemical analysis of materials is consistently increasing and the plants that process concrete and asphalt have to have chemists or engineers test what a lab tech or even a plant operator did before.

If the quality were improved or if the costs were decreasing, I would applaud the microengineering and technical analysis. The problem is they aren't. The quality is many cases is worse and the costs are spiraling. The pre-construction engineering costs have increased to nearly 1 Million dollars per road mile.

Regarding your first paragraph, DOTs rely upon consultants for more complex, large projects, but the bulk of the quantity of projects is still done in-house: Most paving projects and smaller bridge replacements and rehabs, etc., etc.  I think there is some pressure from lobbyists to move that line down to have more consultants to do the work, which will raise engineering costs.

Add pressure from your state lawmakers "to do more with less" by cutting FTE counts regardless of the need; thereby forcing DOTs to contract out more and more work.

In NY, I've seen hiring practices/allowances at NYSDOT be a "talking out of both sides of our mouths" on this.  Although I've seen some regional design groups squeezed and some more work going to consultants (resulting in a higher engineering cost), there's now a proposal for assistant engineers and titles lower in grade than that to no longer require a civil service exam, in the name of making the hiring process easier to relieve this situation (it's just a proposal right now). 

However again, NY Civil Service salaries for engineers are lower than in the private sector and the retirement pension has been whittled away for newer employees (although a significant remnant remains, compared to a typical 401(k)).  Add to that NYSDOT leaving telecommuting policies to the discretion of main office and regional directors, rather than having one department-wide policy, and you have some boomers or other leaders that come from the operations side of the Department that restrict telecommuting to the point where ot also becomes a disadvantage to hiring against the private sector.

So, you see actions pulling in contradictory ways on this one, when it comes to support for the statement that there is a deliberate effort to push more engineering to consultants.

Quote from: Rothman on January 25, 2024, 08:57:49 AM

Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 25, 2024, 08:26:15 AM

Quote from: civilengineeringnerdbasic education on infrastructure costs should be made mandatory to graduate high school

No. The thing that actually needs to happen (especially if there would be a giant hike in gasoline and EV charging taxes) is the highway industry needs to provide a full accounting to explain why their costs have long outstripped the pace of inflation. These guys are operating with a blank check.

This statement is one made out of a certain level of ignorance and an overly simplistic view of how the CPI works when it comes to inflation (I mean, take any industry sector and its own inflation rate will be out of whack with the CPI).

What, you don't think DOT's do bid analyses at the project level and market analyses at the program level?  DOTs review every low bid, item by item, against market conditions.

And it isn't like the "transportation industry" is monolithic.  Think of everything that must come together for a project to be built -- labor, engineering, materials, expertise...Businesses hiring businesses to get the job done, so the effects on cost are not simple.

Certainly, regulation has increased design costs over time.  But, those regulations are here to stay, since getting rid of them means you're against preserving the environment (NEPA), historical features (federal/state historical regs, Section 106...), recreational areas (4f), etc., etc.

However, contractors have mostly pointed at material costs as the main culprit behind construction inflation, especially with steel and asphalt.

So, great, now that you have an idea behind what's behind inflation in the construction industry, what is to be done about it?  Build bridges without steel?  Build roads without asphalt?  Just bulldoze a freeway through your neighborhood without your input (people tend to forget that public outreach is from and not separate from NEPA)?  Perhaps we should go back to the days when DOTs could just kick people out of their homes indiscriminately to save on ROW costs...

Anyway, the more I hear about "runaway inflation" arguments, the more I question if they're really disingenuous given the realities.

this right here is why it should be required to know the basics of how and what infrastructure projects get funded, just to graduate high school.
many people don't understand this, especially in the state where i live and other such states, as the majority (wrongfully of course) think and assume that DOTs are just being greedy and they expect the same gas tax to cover all roads and all projects for as long as they live, not understanding that inflation drives prices of goods that make up infrastructure, among other costs you mentioned here. when you have the majority illiterate on the costs of infrastructure and upkeep of said infrastructure, it can be bad for states, as raising gas taxes would equate to loss of political power during the next election cycle.

You cationalize the bullshit with excuses all you want. In the end those rising costs get passed down to general public. Not everyone of us is getting big fat, fucking pay raises year after year. Most of the so-called income growth that has been happening in the US has been happening primarily in the top 10 percentile. But the media averages it out to make it seem like everyone's paycheck is getting bigger.

Dismissing inflation or making excuses for it is very out of touch. Lots of ordinary working class people are financially stretched. The rising costs of food, housing and so many other things has made people angry.

It's laughable to suggest high school students should know budget aspects of infrastructure. First, most people couldn't care less about such nerdy stuff. Next: a bunch of these kids can't even balance a check book. Obviously there is a great deal of adults in positions of power who completely forgot how to balance a check book as well.

Ummmmm......getting back on topic....


The revised contract for the bridge replacement was approved earlier this week by the same Senate Transportation Committee that rejected the earlier contract proposal; and the contract is now officially signed.


Announcement by the LADOTD (https://wwwapps.dotd.la.gov/administration/announcements/Announcement.aspx?key=34869)


The committee hearing was still eventful because the same trucker's groups who raised holy Hell at the original meeting were still not happy with the revised proposal, even though it did cut their toll price down by a third.



Article in Louisiana Illuminator On Senate Committee Approval of Revised Bridge Contract (https://lailluminator.com/2024/01/31/i-10-bridge-tolls/)




Final approval for the bonds needed to finance the project is expected in April; construction to begin next year with completion set for 2030.

^ Don't worry, truckers and other through traffic will just divert to I-210...

Quote from: sprjus4 on January 31, 2024, 08:55:20 PM
^ Don't worry, truckers and other through traffic will just divert to I-210...

Nah, they will pay it. People gripe about tolls, but in actuality except in the cases of express lanes, they tend to gripe about them and go on.